Author
Topic: How to spend money (Read 6905 times)

I am having to agree with people here that the 5D3 would be a great body to get if you really feel you need a new body. Looking at what you shoot I still feel that you are lacking reach and although you can always rent the glass you need there's nothing like being able to pull out your own super telephoto to just play around with when bored (at least it's nice for me). I have heard some great things about the 5D3 from others that use it for BIF.

Just moved from the 7D to the 5DIII myself. The difference is noticable. Actually, I just got back from a trip where I used both bodies and my wife noticed the difference in the images. I believe her comment was "the 5 camera does a lot better in low light, doesn't it?"

AF of the 5DIII is significantly better than the 7D. After several days of shooting, it was actually a little painful to go back to the 7D.

So, my advice, get 5DIII and either put the rest aside to save for a lens/tripod or buy something nice for your wife. If she let you get your current gear, my guess is that she is a keeper.

with the lenses that you have, its surprising you haven't gone full frame already. I suppose the real question is do YOU feel the 1Dx is overkill for an amateur? Obviously the best camera in the Canon range, so would you be able to make do with the 5D mk3 instead?..... there are a lot of people who would love to have this dilemma!!!!

I highly suspect the 7DII is going to be superior in some 'sports shooting' way the same way the 7D was over the 5DmkII/1Div . . . but you don't seem like you want to wait

I am sorry to get off topic here but in what way is the 7D more superior than the 1DIV?

I'm trying to find some information on it (thought I read it somewhere); this was the best that I could find quickly:"With these densely-packed AF points, new features have become a reality. In many ways, this is the most sophisticated AF system ever in an EOS digital SLR, in some ways surpassing the flexibility of Canon’s top-of-the-line EOS-1D and EOS-1Ds series cameras."

with the lenses that you have, its surprising you haven't gone full frame already. I suppose the real question is do YOU feel the 1Dx is overkill for an amateur? Obviously the best camera in the Canon range, so would you be able to make do with the 5D mk3 instead?..... there are a lot of people who would love to have this dilemma!!!!

I specifically did not buy any EF-S lenses because I knew I wanted to go FF some day. And because I realized that L-lenses are a better deal in the end. And of course now (with the fisheye and the 16-35) I am frustrated with the crop sensor.And yes, I am fully aware that I am spoiled to have this dilemma...

@docsmith & emag: Of course my wife is a keeper... And she also knows that she needs to let me get a new toy occasionally But I have already bought so many things that she absolutely needed that she figured it out by now. Now she only laughs at me when I mention a big lens...

@dstppy: yes, high-ISO on the 7D really is terrible (as has been mentioned often enough). I had AF problems when shooting BIF and kite-surfers on a lake with a forest behind them - I was quite surprised, but for some reason the system did not manage to follow. Granted, kite-surfers in air are so slow that you can pick a single AF point and follow by hand, but I wanted to test the camera and it failed (this was with a rented 300/2.8, btw). With the birds it was similar - when the focus was on the bird it was really on it, and the image was sharp. But with the fast motion the bird was lost all to often. I don't know if others have made similar experiences or if I did something wrong there, but it was quite frustrating.

In any case, thanks all for your answers. The underlying issue is, of course, that I am a sucker for tech-stuff. And the 1DX just fascinates me. Mostly the super-high ISO, the low-light focusing ability, and the high frame-rate. I am never really in a situation where I would absolutely need 12 fps, let alone 14 - after all, I don't sell the photos anyway, so if I miss THE moment it is never all that much of a problem. Usually my anticipation is enough to get a shot that I am somewhat happy with. For everything else I guess the 5Diii is on par with the 1DX (OK, I also don't need the better water-resistance and added ruggedness).Another advantage of the 5Diii would of course be that I could then afford to keep the 7D and have both FF and crop. If I would get the 1DX I would probably sell the 7D. I have also been considering getting the 300/2.8, selling the 7D and buying a used 350D instead

go medium format just need some more money for that but I believe you gonna love it phase one 645d

Thanks for the tip - I had actually bought a (2nd hand, of course) Mamiya RB67 at some point around 15 years ago, but never really had the time to learn how to properly use it... Not the camera for me (for the same reason I don't do much landscape photography. I am not all that patient ) Beautiful device, though!

The 5DMKIII is also much lighter and compact in comparison and has 90% of the features you would actually use. With big whites tripods or monopods are pretty much a must so its not like the 1DX feels more balanced with it.

Carrying a massive camera, lens and tripod all the time takes its toll. Maybe a personal trainer haha or hiring someone to carry your kit

To each his own. Obviously you know you are lucky to have this problem and not snooty about it.

If it were me, I'd keep the 7D, buy a 5DIII and a 100-400 zoom, then pick out a great location to take my wife, where I could also use the cameras and lenses. Travel is ALWAYS a good investment in my book.

I highly suspect the 7DII is going to be superior in some 'sports shooting' way the same way the 7D was over the 5DmkII/1Div . . . but you don't seem like you want to wait

I am sorry to get off topic here but in what way is the 7D more superior than the 1DIV?

I'm trying to find some information on it (thought I read it somewhere); this was the best that I could find quickly:"With these densely-packed AF points, new features have become a reality. In many ways, this is the most sophisticated AF system ever in an EOS digital SLR, in some ways surpassing the flexibility of Canon’s top-of-the-line EOS-1D and EOS-1Ds series cameras."

Travel is the only thing you can do that makes you richer. The camera you have with you is always the best camera.

In this case I would be against the 1Dx and the 300/400mm because they are both niche products and a pain in the ass to carry around. 5DMKIII and the 100-400 would make a better option but still a pain for traveling.

Really the usability of 300/400mm lenses are best suited for sports and birding/wildlife. If thats your main use then ye.

I think a good compromise is the 70-200mm F2.8 MKII With a 2x extender if you are traveling around. Thats what I use but the MKI non IS lens. IQ is not stellar but more than useable on my 5DMKIII

You would have a lot of money left over and still an incredible kit.

Apart from my Camera equipment my other passion is cars and BMW M cars are my poison otherwise I would have many more exotic lenses

Travel is the only thing you can do that makes you richer. The camera you have with you is always the best camera.

In this case I would be against the 1Dx and the 300/400mm because they are both niche products and a pain in the ass to carry around. 5DMKIII and the 100-400 would make a better option but still a pain for traveling.

Really the usability of 300/400mm lenses are best suited for sports and birding/wildlife. If thats your main use then ye.

I think a good compromise is the 70-200mm F2.8 MKII With a 2x extender if you are traveling around. Thats what I use but the MKI non IS lens. IQ is not stellar but more than useable on my 5DMKIII

You would have a lot of money left over and still an incredible kit.

Apart from my Camera equipment my other passion is cars and BMW M cars are my poison otherwise I would have many more exotic lenses

I guess more importantly the camera is always only as good as the person behind it... (and I am not a 1DX )But I actually found that the 300/2.8 is an incredible lens also for "macro" type photography (wild flowers, and bugs, mostly). Nevertheless, it certainly is not suitable as an always-on... I must say that since I have used the 300 I am always a bit disappointed when taking a picture with the 70-200 (IS, mark I). I guess I have tasted the honey and can not let go anymore... The funny thing is that when I first rented it my reasoning was simply to see what justifies that kind of price. I believed that it is sufficiently expensive (and expected a difference sufficiently small) to never really make me consider buying it... boy was I wrong!! Most people here probably know this, but I felt like the photos from the zoom lens were taken with an iPhone (well, not quite... but almost).

I can see how BMW M are poison (that tastes good)... In that respect I am happy since cars I would be passionate about (basically Mercedes from the early 70s and before, or electric sports cars...) are so totally out of range for me that I just stick with my 15 year old volvo